Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-14-Speech-4-049-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120614.6.4-049-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I have some concluding remarks.
I hope that we will return to this very quickly with our Cypriot friends.
I would like to thank all of the speakers who took the floor and from whom I gather there is general support for the overall compromises we reached in committee. There were, of course – and I heard them, along with the Commission – colours, tones, priorities which we are aware of and which vary depending on the groups or individuals in question.
Some important issues were mentioned here: gluten-free food – the Commissioner has just returned to this point so I will return to it as well – labelling and advertising, questions on the added value of follow-on milk, the famous GUMS (growing-up milks), which Ms de Lange and Mr Schlyter mentioned. We have heard their concerns; I share them myself. We will come back to them.
Then, the question of pesticides came up repeatedly, particularly in Ms Klaß’s speech: this is – as the Commissioner has just said – the linchpin of the overall, horizontal legislation which we all worked on together several months ago, and we have focused here on the even more ambitious, more precise and more specific needs of the groups concerned. However, we did it together precisely so that the texts would be coherent with the horizontal legislation.
I would just like to talk about something which was not mentioned, perhaps because the Danish Presidency is not here, and that is the lack of agreement at first reading. The failure of this attempt is also to some extent the fault of the Presidency, but it is also perhaps because we are discovering the limitations of this fast track procedure.
It is a method that we have used far too much since the beginning of this mandate, since 2009, and one in which Parliament and Parliament’s ambitions are not always taken into account, in my view. I therefore still believe that our decision to go to the vote and, indeed, to make a fresh start for a second reading – which I hope will be quick – is still the right decision.
I will finish with the two major disagreements with the Commission, which I noted when listening to the Commissioner.
The first is the question of gluten-free products. There are many of us here – the majority in fact – who think that returning to the ‘food information to consumers’ legislation will not be enough. That goes beyond the question of labelling. For us, Article 36 of the Regulation on the provision of food information to consumers is not enough in terms of quality, safety and composition. However, we will come back to that.
With regard to the question of delegated acts – you mentioned that at the very beginning, Commissioner – we, as Parliament, still want to be involved in any decision, through our right to scrutiny, for example, on amendments to the famous Union list. We are therefore holding firm on the question of delegated acts, but these are issues that are open."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples